W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-international@w3.org > July to September 2009

RE: Comments on Best Practices for Authoring HTML: RTL Scripts (Editorial comments only; was "Comments on Best Practices for Authoring HTML: RTL Scripts")

From: CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 14:44:01 -0400
Message-ID: <BLU109-W3836C2808F12183A93F5BB3170@phx.gbl>
To: <ishida@w3.org>, <www-international@w3.org>

I'll try to read the rest of this draft (http://www.w3.org/TR/i18n-html-tech-bidi/)
) more carefully!  Mati has done a better job.
One note for BP 11:
Section 7, BP 11,  "HOW TO,"  Par 3:
{COMMENT:  Change "allows" to "allow"--two items conjoined by "and" should be treated as a plural; see http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/599/01/ }

"On the other hand, attribute text and element text that allows no internal markup, . . . "

=> "On the other hand, attribute text and element text that allow no internal markup

Sorry for my goofs on the following items:

>> Section 7, BP 8, Example 11
>> {COMMENT I'm having problems with the placement of the comma here--should it be\
>> adjacent to the word W3C, or should it follow the Hebrew words, "Internationalization
>> Activity??"  (The direction that the comma is pointing in this example is confusing!)  See >> also my comments on Example 16, below.}

> RI: It should be as you see it in the example. The comma is often a surprise to people not familiar > with Hebrew text, but for those who are, it looks normal

(I have seen Hebrew text--although I read but few of the letters--but not enough Hebrew commas I guess and certainly not enough mixing of ltr and rtl scripts--but I still do not like the shape of the comma; I suppose that my real problem is having two items, one in an rtl script and one in an ltr script conjoined by a comma--as you can never decide which item the comma should follow??--but it's necessary here)
>> . . .
>> * * *
>> Section 8, BP 10, Example 16
>> {COMMENT:  Again as with Example 11, I am having problems with the comma; where > you've placed it is not right!  The comma should immediately follow 'al-Bh.riin (going 
>> from right to left)!  And it should be turned a different direction.  The white space
>> thus comes to the left of the comma not to the right.}

> RI: Yes, it is not right in the first graphic  that's part of the problem we are addressing.  I 
>added " , and the comma is misplaced" to the first sentence in the example.  It should not 
> be turned a different direction, since it is part of the English text, not an Arabic comma. 
My mistake; I am not that familiar with having Arabic text and English text together in a line and I missed that the comma was part of the English
>>* * *
>>Section 8, BP 10, Par 3, 1rst sentence

> . . . 
>> "Whereas Example 16 shows a case that occurs only rarely in English.  Because of
>> the likelihood of foreign text showing up in languages written with the Arabic or
>> Hebrew scripts, this situation is much more common when writing in those
>> languages. Example 17 shows a typical case."

> RI: Hmm.  That breaks the sense of the sentence and leaves the first sentence looking 
> unfinished. If we omit the 'whereas', however, that will work.
 Thanks for breaking up the long sentence; again my goof.

C. E. Whitehead
Received on Sunday, 26 July 2009 18:44:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:40:57 UTC